Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in the Adelaide and North Adelaide areas.
-
Ho Really
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2721
- Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
- Location: In your head
#391
Post
by Ho Really » Mon Sep 24, 2007 1:07 am
crawf wrote:Yes, the telstra office building
No, it's the building opposite on the western corner of Peel and Grenfell Streets with the Polites sign.
Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.
-
Düsseldorfer
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 288
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:52 am
#392
Post
by Düsseldorfer » Wed Sep 26, 2007 4:04 am
This looks like it will be great for the skyline. But a question to the politicians and the powers that be who run the whole height restrictions thing, what are the restrictions for anyway? i don't see that many planes flying just above the height of the tallest building in the city (which its name now btw, Stantos House, Westpac Tower??).
I do hope this building gets built because it should start the trend going of better architecture than we already have. Even though I'm not living in Adelaide any more i still have hope for it because it was where i was born and raised and someday i might return. When it is completed it should win an architecture award or something.
-
Paulns
- Donating Member
- Posts: 470
- Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:55 am
#393
Post
by Paulns » Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:59 am
Totally agree mate what the hell do they need these stupid height restrictions for??????
In Hong Kong the airport was that close to the buildings that the planes used to appear to almost skim the roof tops and yet Hong Kong is still one of the most busiest airports in the world???? I'm sure theres heaps of airports and cities around the world that have obsticles, even mountains?? So why the hell do they make such a big deal about it in Adelaide?
Its these type of stupid rules that keep holding Adelaide back..
"SA GOING ALL THE WAY".
-
aussie2000
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 225
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 1:12 pm
- Location: Adelaide, Australia
-
Contact:
#394
Post
by aussie2000 » Wed Sep 26, 2007 9:00 am
i thought it was wespac house, but in news articles and everywhere else its called waspac tower
-
Ho Really
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2721
- Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
- Location: In your head
#395
Post
by Ho Really » Wed Sep 26, 2007 11:56 am
Düsseldorfer wrote:...But a question to the politicians and the powers that be who run the whole height restrictions thing, what are the restrictions for anyway? i don't see that many planes flying just above the height of the tallest building in the city (which its name now btw, Stantos House, Westpac Tower??)...
Unfortunately planes do fly right over this proposed development and the Westpac Tower (ex-SANTOS House). What I and many others here would like to see is flightpath changes. Planes of all kinds except emergency helicopters and those with government permission should be prohibited from flying over the square mile.
Paulns wrote:In Hong Kong the airport was that close to the buildings that the planes used to appear to almost skim the roof tops and yet Hong Kong is still one of the most busiest airports in the world????...
What you saw in Hong Kong were planes landing at the old airport of Kai Tak on the mainland (Kowloon) opposite Hong Kong Island and the CBD. Take a look at some pics
here. Even in Adelaide planes fly close to houses when they land. The new airport is at Chek Lap Kok, Lantau a fair distance from Hong Kong's CBD.
Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.
-
skyliner
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2359
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:16 pm
- Location: fassifern (near Brisbane)
#396
Post
by skyliner » Wed Sep 26, 2007 2:50 pm
Ho Really, what then is causing such rigid and prolonged flight path options. Is there no other way to approach Adelaide airport? Is it the prevailing wind direction, landing strip orientation, visuals etc etc??? I'd really like to understand this as it is causing Adelaide many developmental issues, such as with the project under discussion.
] heard that Santos' height was allowed in the face of the stringent airport requirements. Surely this can be done again - and if so, what of landing/takeoff trajectories then? If a precedent is laid down with the Curri St bldg,(as already with Santos) what then? The whole thing seems full of anomelies and contradictions - a morass of mines.
ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE
Jack.
-
Ben
- VIP Member
- Posts: 7577
- Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 11:46 am
- Location: Adelaide
#397
Post
by Ben » Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:03 pm
skyliner wrote:Ho Really, what then is causing such rigid and prolonged flight path options. Is there no other way to approach Adelaide airport? Is it the prevailing wind direction, landing strip orientation, visuals etc etc??? I'd really like to understand this as it is causing Adelaide many developmental issues, such as with the project under discussion.
] heard that Santos' height was allowed in the face of the stringent airport requirements. Surely this can be done again - and if so, what of landing/takeoff trajectories then? If a precedent is laid down with the Curri St bldg,(as already with Santos) what then? The whole thing seems full of anomelies and contradictions - a morass of mines.
ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE
I really don't think the height limits are enforced by AAL but the ACC. There is talk of an 8 story hotel on the airport site. ACC wants a "Pyramid" shape skyline and wants to maintain the character of the CBD and minimise shading issues. Yes AAL needs to be informed of proposals over a certain height but I think you'll find upon investigation it is purely the council that is restraining the heights of city buildings. (Infact this was actually brought up in the DAP meeting I went to for this building), The architects said that the height of this building will keep in line with the councils Pyramid skyline vision for the city.
-
urban
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 611
- Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 10:59 am
- Location: City of Unley
#398
Post
by urban » Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:29 pm
This pyramid skyline idea is bizarre. I can't see how it produces a better city. Anyone with ideas let me know.
Everyone keep your eyes out for the next Adelaide Development Plan Community Consultation and post it on this website so that we can all provide feedback on the absurdity.
-
Ben
- VIP Member
- Posts: 7577
- Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 11:46 am
- Location: Adelaide
#399
Post
by Ben » Wed Sep 26, 2007 3:38 pm
urban wrote:Everyone keep your eyes out for the next Adelaide Development Plan Community Consultation and post it on this website so that we can all provide feedback on the absurdity.
I believe it will not be that far off maybe a few months after the council elections.
-
crawf
- Donating Member
- Posts: 5521
- Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:49 pm
- Location: Adelaide
#400
Post
by crawf » Wed Sep 26, 2007 4:43 pm
Isn't the potential hirise towers on City Central and Renaissance Arcade, going to ruin it?
I hope the ACC axe this plan, because the city skyline is starting to have pymind shape from some angles and its not a good look.
-
skyliner
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2359
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:16 pm
- Location: fassifern (near Brisbane)
#401
Post
by skyliner » Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:16 pm
this pyramid shape comes from 'TheCity Of Adelaide Plan' in 1974 as published by Urban Systems Corporation PTY LTD for th ACC. Robert Clampett Lord mayor at the time.
IMO it is so restrictive and caused so many problems for developers that the aesthetic gain is a waste of time. It is breached in all kinds of locations as it is and only really seems to come into play when development might make Adelaide look bigger than current pet ideas held. But I sse the poiunt that it really is the ACC that is the culprit.
ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE.
Jack.
-
Ben
- VIP Member
- Posts: 7577
- Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 11:46 am
- Location: Adelaide
#402
Post
by Ben » Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:44 pm
Check out what this nimby wrote to the messenger we should all write in and tell them "Adelaide's majestic skyline" is not meant to stagnate but grow with time.
-
Cruise
- Banned
- Posts: 2201
- Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 pm
- Location: Bay 115, Football Park
#403
Post
by Cruise » Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:04 pm
ahahahahahaha
-
Pikey
- VIP Member
- Posts: 2496
- Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 7:41 am
- Location: Sitting Down
#404
Post
by Pikey » Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:11 pm
Unless all of a sudden, the sun will shine light from below the cantilevered section, there's no way it'd be reflected down onto the road - what a fuckwit.
-
Howie
- VIP Member
- Posts: 4877
- Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:55 pm
- Location: Adelaide
-
Contact:
#405
Post
by Howie » Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:19 pm
D Wilden fails at physics. And obviously has no qualifications as an energy rating expert... so really he should shut his trap and build a bridge.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 15 guests